JUDGMENT:

Two convicts filed this Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the Judgement dated 29-4-2010 of the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur in Sessions Case No.4 of 2010. By the impugned judgment they were found guilty for the offence under section 8(c) read with section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘for short NDPS Act,1985’). Each of them was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and pay a fine of Rupees One Lakh with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for two years.

02. Respondent herein is the State which led the prosecution of these appellants before the learned trial Court.

03. The case of the prosecution is that, in pursuance of the orders of the Assistant Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise Enforcement Wing of Guntur, officers of the department belonging to Prohibition and Excise stations of Mangalagiri and Guntur formed a team and were engaged in patrolling duty for the purpose of prevention and detection of offences. On 9th January 2010 at about 10.00 A.M. near Peddavadlapudi Cross Road on the left side of National Highway number five and opposite to Bharat Petrol Bunk they found these two accused sitting on two bags. On seeing these officers, the accused were perturbed and tried to run away from there. On that the officers detained them and questioned them. Both the accused disclosed their identity and confessed that they have been holding ganja in their bags. The officers weighed the first bag and found 20 Kgs of Ganja in it. They weighed the second bag and found 16 kgs of Ganja in it. In the presence of panch witnesses they drew hundred grams of Ganja from each of the bags as samples. They arrested the accused, seized the contraband. They sealed the contraband and the samples and pasted identity slips on them over which the witnesses signed. In evidence of all this Panchnama was made. On coming back to Excise Police Station, Mangalagiri, a Crime was registered as per PR number 110/09-10 and F.I.R was issued and was forwarded to the Court. The accused were also forwarded to the Court. The Inspector of Mangalagiri Excise Station immediately made a report of all this to his official superiors. The contraband and the samples were produced before the Court. Through Court samples were forwarded to the analyst. The analyst examined the samples and gave a report that each of the two samples contain Ganja. The learned trial Court returned the contraband for appropriate disposal of it according to law. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was laid before the court.

04. The learned First Additional Sessions Judge, took cognizance for the offences and secured the presence of accused and furnished them with copies of documents.

Before the trial Court the accused were represented by their own learned counsel. On hearing the submissions of the learned Special Assistant Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for defence and on perusal of the record charge under Section 8(c) read with 20(b)(ii)(C) of NDPS Act, 1985 was framed. The charge was read over and explained to the accused and they denied the charge mentioned allegations and pleaded not guilty.

05. During the course of trial, prosecution examined Pws.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9 and MOs.1 to 4. Inspector of Mangalgiri Excise Police Station, testified as Pw.2. Village Revenue Officer of Mangalgiri who was a panch witness testified as Pw.1. Samples of ganja that were picked up at the spot of offence were marked as MOs.1 and 2. For the contraband inventory was taken and in the presence of learned Magistrate two samples were picked up and they were exhibited as MO.3 and MO.4.

06. The incriminating material available on record was offered to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the truth of entire evidence. Accused were invited to enter their evidence and they reported no evidence on their behalf.

07. On heari